Okay. The Bible states that god is omnipotent and omniscient. I have just proved that they are incompatible. There'a a discrepancy right there.

No. I do not believe that everybody is entitled to their own beliefs. Was Hitler entitled to his view that Jews were an inferior race? Are racists entitled to their view that blacks are inferior?

Actually, come to think of it, everybody is entitled to their own beliefs as long as they keep it to their own backyard. If Hitler hated Jews in his mind but never did anything about it, I would be perfectly fine with it. But religion constantly enters, influences and juggles with state policy which influences everyone. This is completely unacceptable. I am simply asking the reason for your beliefs, and so far, I have not seen an explanation which satisfies me.

Once again, this thread was made to see the reasons for the beliefs of both sides.



EDIT:


There is still a difference between me and Adam. Why am I not given a chance to be holy at birth?


So there is something god cannot do?


For the last time, how "could" he? If he can, or could, then he is not all knowing. If he can't or couldn't then he is not all powerful.

Im pretty sure i showed a way in which they could be compatible. you kinda ignored all my previous posts on that topic in there...

And in some ways, it's not religion, but common sense that goes into politics. And you're assuming everyone in the church feels the same way. Plenty are ok with gay rights, for example.

If NO personal beliefs were in politics, how would they exist? There would be no reason to run, no reason to pay taxes, no stances on any position; religion just influences moral values. i dont see how there's anything wrong with that. It's a moral line you should draw, not a personal-social one.

EDIT: posted before i saw your post.

No, it's more of that he can do too much, not a lack of being able to do something.


It's the nature of sin. not any choice made by anyone. Original sin passes down from person to person. it's of no personal fault of anyone.

And i answer you one last time, they can co-exist. He CAN change it, but he knows he wont. Therefore, he wouldnt be violating anything. he CAN but WONT. he knows he never would and wouldnt have the reason to, therefore, he CAN but knows he would never have to.

And... this is turning into a circular argument. =.= This goes back into my... earlier post. If he is omnipotent/omniscient, he would have found a way to do ALL these things. After all, he is omnipotent/omniscient. Don't ask me how. I'm using your logic.

God (or humans who believe in God to begin with) wrote Bible. Bible proves God existence.


Hm... =/

Actually, I agree. But I didn't make this thread so I really don't care one way or the other.

See: Vasu (disproving a negative)

Ralath, you forget that God helps those who helps themselves. he wants us to make some of the choices and not to do it all himself.

Once again, with no wrong choice, there is no right.

.

He's able and willing, but he would rather have us do some of it for ourselves.

I'm beginning to wonder if Manzacar was right, and if this thread is an attack on religion, not a fair and even discussion. when i post something that makes sense, you bring up an argument for it, which is acceptable. but when i post a counterargument, you bring up your first point, creating a circular argument yourselves.

I'll deal with this below.


Well, I wouldn't be too well versed with the goings on in there, but the main point on one of the party's agenda is to build a "magnificent temple for Lord Ram", and they slam anyone who even appears to question his existence. Atheists are pretty much oppressed here with statements like, "Haha, did you make the universe." I realise that is beside the point though.


Ayway, I wonder what influenced Prop. 8?




Sometimes in the wrong way.


I'm sorry, but I don't understand. Please clarify.


So the nature of sin is to be ascribed to someone who hasn't done anything to deserve it.

By the very fact that he CAN, he is not omniscient.



I'm sorry if some of you feel personally offended. But can you show me one place where I did such a thing? If you are talking about the omniscience/omnipotence incompatibility issue, I simply did not understand your responses.

I can sum up all of your questions in a single sentence, It will blow your mind.



Wait and see.

He's too powerful NOT to lift the rock. that's what my point was.

And yes, whenever you bring humans into play, there will be corruption.

And i see no contradiction between omniciency and omnipitance. Perhaps you should ask him yourself if you end up in heaven?

and here in america, there ARE secular republicans too, citing their own religion-less moral values, so it's not all because of religion

*shrug* Takes two people to have a circular argument. You keep bringing up the same points that I've responded to. And yet, you come up with nothing new.

IMO, that's what religion (or even science) HAS to do--withstand criticism. That's how we make sure the bad theories (ie. geocentrism or the world is flat) go away.